Interesting debate: Sino-Indo conflict, who is to blame?

[nimo_cn]

Neville Maxwell presents some of the same arguments in during a public debate with British Indian professor Dibyesh Anand at the Australian National University's Asia Pacific center. The debate is interesting and worth a listen.

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/__data/assets/mp3_file/0004/2686/India_China_Border.mp3

Very fascinating debate.

 

[BloodRed]

lol Neville Maxwell know chinese stooge talks about Indo china relations. Knowing his past dislike for any type of democracy and fervent worship of dictatorial regimes i will give this debate a miss

 

[Rage]

Let me spare you the hassle of a 'Maxwellian' debate.

The Indians will always believe that China's invasion of Tibet constituted the first aggression that led to the Sino-Indian conflict. Frankly, your invasion of a buffer state- a state we did not consider your own, made us uneasy. The Chinese will always believe that India's 'incursions' into Tibet prompted the Sino-Indian border conflict. Nehru's 'Forward Policy' was what was responsible for deterioration of relations.

The two are irreconcilable. How do you put a quantity to 'unease' or empirically determine Tibet's status- or for that matter Bangladesh's, or Burma's, or Bhutan's, or Taiwan's? The arguments are 'equally' good on both sides.

Que sera, sera. What will be will be. At least, until the next generation of revolutions take over.


P.S.: Nevill Maxwell is our equivalent of Gordon Chang.

 

[jazzguy]

Frankly, your invasion of a buffer state- a state we did not consider your own, made us uneasy.

All countries in the world including India recognized Tibet is part of China. Before Tibet was retaken by PRC in 1950, no countries in the world recognized Tibet was an independent state.

 

[Rage]

All countries in the world including India recognized Tibet is part of China. Before Tibet was retaken by PRC in 1950, no countries in the world recognized Tibet was an independent state.

Son, we recognized Tibet as a 'part of China' only in 2003, 54 years after China first invaded it*. Before that, Tibet was always an ambiguous question. Our housing of the Tibetan Government-in-exile should offer you some inkling as to our underlying policy.

*Besides, that treaty only holds so long as China respects our "settled regions", including Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh.

Tibet was recognized, de facto, as an independent state by several countries' long before the PRC-invasion. You do not sign state-state treaties with countries that are under occupation.

This should give you some insight into Tibet's legal and inter-national status before China's invasion. Notwithstanding the title:

http://www.freetibet.org/about/legal-status

 

[jazzguy]

Son, we recognized Tibet as a 'part of China' only in 2003, 54 years after China first invaded it*.

It's very interested to know that Indian always call the elder using this word. Your first PM, Nehru, told everybody in 1953 that Tibet was part of China. For detail, see Hindustandtimes:

Giving a new twist to ongoing controversy over India's approach to Tibet issue, BJP on Tuesday said that New Delhi accepted Tibet as a part of China in 1953 during the government of then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru.

"The Vajpayee government did not made any mistake on the issue," BJP President Rajnath Singh said, while commenting on former Defence Minister George Fernandes' statement that the previous NDA government had recognised Tibet as part of China, committing an "error".
"It was Nehru who made a mistake on the Tibet issue in 1953. Jawaharlal Nehru had recognised Tibet as part of China in 1953 and the successive governments are following it," Singh told reporters here.
BJP has been critical of the UPA government's response to the recent unrest in Tibet, saying the approach had been "shameful".
"The government has been having a very weak stand on the Tibet issue only because of the pressure from the Left parties. It is an appeasement towards China and the government has no regard for the country's honour," Singh said.
Left parties have, however, said the government's policy on Tibet has been correct.
The BJP chief condemned the Chinese crackdown on the protesters in Tibet and asked Beijing to show "maximum restraint" in handling the situation there.

 

[Rage]

It's very interested to know that Indian always call the elder using this word. Your first PM, Nehru, told everybody in 1953 that Tibet was part of China. For detail, see Hindustandtimes:

Giving a new twist to ongoing controversy over India's approach to Tibet issue, BJP on Tuesday said that New Delhi accepted Tibet as a part of China in 1953 during the government of then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru.

"The Vajpayee government did not made any mistake on the issue," BJP President Rajnath Singh said, while commenting on former Defence Minister George Fernandes' statement that the previous NDA government had recognised Tibet as part of China, committing an "error".
"It was Nehru who made a mistake on the Tibet issue in 1953. Jawaharlal Nehru had recognised Tibet as part of China in 1953 and the successive governments are following it," Singh told reporters here.
BJP has been critical of the UPA government's response to the recent unrest in Tibet, saying the approach had been "shameful".
"The government has been having a very weak stand on the Tibet issue only because of the pressure from the Left parties. It is an appeasement towards China and the government has no regard for the country's honour," Singh said.
Left parties have, however, said the government's policy on Tibet has been correct.
The BJP chief condemned the Chinese crackdown on the protesters in Tibet and asked Beijing to show "maximum restraint" in handling the situation there.

Don't be a fool. You obviously don't know about inter-party politics in India, since you live in a one-party society.

Furnish me with documents where India *legally* and *officially* recognized China's right to Tibet in 1953. Otherwise save the garbage for the can.

The statement, "t was Nehru who made a mistake on the Tibet issue in 1953", refers to Nehru's dawdling on sending troops to the Tibet region. The words "no regard for the country's honour", "appeasement" etc should suffice as to what's being said.

 

[Param]

So what's the big deal? The day Chinese forces try to invade Arunachal or any other border region, India would not only derecognize China's claim on Tibet but also start helping Tibetans in their struggle against Chinese occupation.

 

[jazzguy]

Don't be a fool. You obviously don't know about inter-party politics in India, since you live in a one-party society.

How do you know I am in one party society? How do you know that I am not talking with Indians everyday? Anyway, I am not interested in the topic of South Tibet, Tibet, etc. anymore. It will waste both your time and my time to debate again. Your government will solve this out with Chinese government.

 

[jazzguy]

So what's the big deal? The day Chinese forces try to invade Arunachal or any other border region, India would not only derecognize China's claim on Tibet but also start helping Tibetans in their struggle against Chinese occupation.

Nobody is interested in the war. The border between India and China will be finalized through negotiations. Do you know what's the consequence if you will help Tibetan separate from China?

 

[Param]

Nobody is interested in the war. The border between India and China will be finalized through negotiations. Do you know what's the consequence if you will help Tibetan separate from China?

We might do something like that only if China infringes upon the sovereignty of India. So it consequences don't matter here.

 

[Rage]

How do you know I am in one party society? How do you know that I am not talking with Indians everyday? Anyway, I am not interested in the topic of South Tibet, Tibet, etc. anymore. It will waste both your time and my time to debate again. Your government will solve this out with Chinese government.

How do I know? I gather, from the ardent moxie with which you advocate China's stand over Tibet, that you are a Chinese. Whether you live in the United States or Canada is none of my concern, since you advocate for a state that is a one-party society. Even if you do, it is clear, from the naïveté with which you bring up such an article, that you have not a clue as to inter-party politics.

However, if you want me to find out where you're from, I can from the mods.

You will not debate this again, because you know you will lose this debate. I am more than happy to debate this with you, confirmed in the knowledge that the deal will exhume your falsity.

Stick around on the forum, learn the way this world operates, and maybe you'll be able to bring something better to the table next time.

Till then,
Tschüss

 

[Rage]

Nobody is interested in the war. The border between India and China will be finalized through negotiations. Do you know what's the consequence if you will help Tibetan separate from China?

Consequences? Please. Spare me the bull$hit. We've housed the Dalai Lama for the last forty years.

The border with China has been 'finalized' via the 2003 Agreement. Again, if China infringes upon our sovereignty in A P, the consequences will be catastrophic.

 

[jazzguy]

Consequences? Please. Spare me the bull$hit. We've housed the Dalai Lama for the last forty years.

The border with China has been 'finalized' via the 2003 Agreement. Again, if China infringes upon our sovereignty in A P, the consequences will be catastrophic.

I must praise you that you are a very brave Indian young man. Do your government and your army agree with what you are saying here? India says they will continue on the border negotiation and Dalai Lama is their guest. Don't forget Dalai Lama was one of the reasons that result in 1962 border conflict.

 

[jazzguy]

How do I know? I gather, from the ardent moxie with which you advocate China's stand over Tibet, that you are a Chinese. Whether you live in the United States or Canada is none of my concern, since you advocate for a state that is a one-party society. Even if you do, it is clear, from the naïveté with which you bring up such an article, that you have not a clue as to inter-party politics.

Well, I did not say multi parties or democratic are not a good system. It's very funny that many Indians told me that they were forced on this noisy democratic system by British. Please continue to enjoy your democratic system that you are proud of.

 

[Rage]

I must praise you that you are a very brave Indian young man. Do your government and your army agree with what you are saying here? India says they will continue on the border negotiation and Dalai Lama is their guest. Don't forget Dalai Lama was one of the reasons that result in 1962 border conflict.

With each successive post, you prove to me you are not worth the space you use.

India has said it will continue with "negotiations" with Pakisthan on Kashmir too, within the framework of its being an integral part of a sovereign country. What has changed in the last 60 years. Are you really that naive?

Any "border negotiations" are within the framework of 'non-transferral' of populated regions in China-occupied Kashmir/ a.k.a Aksai-Chin and Arunachal Pradesh, as of the 2003 Agreement that accords Indian recognition of Tibet as part of the PRC. Which, as of 2010, included almost all of Arunaachal Pradesh. Any violation of that treaty, results in a violation of Indian recognition to Tibet's "special status" as an autonomous territory of the P.R.C. also.

The Dalai Lama was not a cause of the 1962 border conflict. The Dalai Lama fled to India in November 1959. If his emigration were part of the conflict, it would have happened long before. Nehru's Forward Policy was the immediate catalyst for the conflict, and China's invasion of Tibet it's remote cause.

You are "brave" enough to come out and spout your nonsense on a thread on which you really know nothing. Now that's truly "brave"!

Go brush up on your history lad.

 

[Rage]

Well, I did not say multi parties or democratic are not a good system. It's very funny that many Indians told me that they were forced on this noisy democratic system by British. Please continue to enjoy your democratic system that you are proud of.

You're a troll.

Whether you agree on it being a "good system" or not, the central issue is that you are clueless as to how it works. India is a multi-party democracy, and if you believe you can quote 'house statements' as living proof of national policy, you're dead to the world.

We'll enjoy our democratic system. You can bugger the $hit off.

 

[jazzguy]

Well, I decided to waste a little bit of my time to show you the following:

The 13th Meeting Between the Chinese and Indian Special Representative on Boundary Question
(August 8 2009)
From August 7 to 8, the 13th Meeting between the Chinese and Indian Special Representative on Boundary Question was held in New Delhi, India. Chinese Special Representative, State Councilor Dai Bingguo met with his counterpart, Mr. Narayanan, India's National Security Advisor. During his stay in India, State Councilor Dai also met with Mrs. Sonia Gandhi, Chairperson of the Indian Congress Party and Prime Minister Singh.
In a friendly and candid atmosphere, the two Special Representatives had an in-depth exchange of views on resolving the boundary question. Both agreed to press ahead with the framework negotiations in accordance with the agreed political parameters and guiding principle so as to seek for a fair and reasonable solution acceptable to both. Prior to that, both should work together to maintain peace and tranquility in the border areas.

 

[Rage]

Well, I decided to waste a little bit of my time to show you the following:

The 13th Meeting Between the Chinese and Indian Special Representative on Boundary Question
(August 8 2009)
From August 7 to 8, the 13th Meeting between the Chinese and Indian Special Representative on Boundary Question was held in New Delhi, India. Chinese Special Representative, State Councilor Dai Bingguo met with his counterpart, Mr. Narayanan, India's National Security Advisor. During his stay in India, State Councilor Dai also met with Mrs. Sonia Gandhi, Chairperson of the Indian Congress Party and Prime Minister Singh.
In a friendly and candid atmosphere, the two Special Representatives had an in-depth exchange of views on resolving the boundary question. Both agreed to press ahead with the framework negotiations in accordance with the agreed political parameters and guiding principle so as to seek for a fair and reasonable solution acceptable to both. Prior to that, both should work together to maintain peace and tranquility in the border areas.

Right, now you're coming to it.

Key words: "framework negotiations in accordance with the agreed political parameters and guiding principles": which are non-transferal of populated regions, including populated boundary territories, the principle of reciprocation- which is India's acknowledgment of Tibet's status given China's recognition of AP, and mutual non-aggression, which is the resolution of all matters non-violently.

 

[jazzguy]

I have something also to do now. If you want to know "agreed political parameters and guiding principles", I will post it next time. It's nothing related to what you posted here. What you said is a good wish for your country.